IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/rdevec/v19y2015i4p820-828.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Specific vs Ad Valorem Strategic Export Subsidies with Taxation Distortion

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Hwang
  • Chao-Cheng Mai
  • Ya-Po Yang

Abstract

This paper employs a model to compare the welfare between optimal specific and ad valorem export subsidies if the subsidy payment is financed by distortional taxation. It is found that the welfare under the specific subsidy regime is higher (lower) than that under the ad valorem subsidy regime if the social cost of taxation distortion is low (high). Moreover, the signs of the two optimal subsidies are also crucially dependent on this social cost. They are positive (negative) if the social cost is low (high).

Suggested Citation

  • Hong Hwang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Ya-Po Yang, 2015. "Specific vs Ad Valorem Strategic Export Subsidies with Taxation Distortion," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 820-828, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:rdevec:v:19:y:2015:i:4:p:820-828
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/rode.12185
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brander, James & Krugman, Paul, 1983. "A 'reciprocal dumping' model of international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3-4), pages 313-321, November.
    2. Delipalla, Sofia & Keen, Michael, 1992. "The comparison between ad valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 351-367, December.
    3. Browning, Edgar K, 1987. "On the Marginal Welfare Cost of Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(1), pages 11-23, March.
    4. Neary, J. Peter, 1994. "Cost asymmetries in international subsidy games: Should governments help winners or losers?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 197-218, November.
    5. Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
    6. Hillman, Arye L & Templeman, Joseph, 1985. "On the Use of Trade Policy Measures by a Small Country to Counter Foreign Monopoly Power," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(2), pages 346-352, June.
    7. Jan G. Jørgensen & Philipp J.H. Schröder, 2005. "Welfare‐ranking ad valorem and specific tariffs under monopolistic competition," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 228-241, February.
    8. Charles Blackorby & Sushama Murty, 2013. "Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 547-579, August.
    9. Harvey E. Lapan & David A. Hennessy, 2011. "Unit versus Ad Valorem Taxes in Multiproduct Cournot Oligopoly," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(1), pages 125-138, February.
    10. David Collie, 2000. "A Rationale for the WTO Prohibition of Export Subsidies: Strategic Export Subsidies and World Welfare," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 229-245, July.
    11. Snow, Arthur & Warren, Ronald Jr., 1996. "The marginal welfare cost of public funds: Theory and estimates," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 289-305, August.
    12. repec:bla:pacecr:v:8:y:2003:i:3:p:193-206 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. David R. Collie, 2006. "Tariffs And Subsidies Under Asymmetric Oligopoly: Ad Valorem Versus Specific Instruments," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 74(3), pages 314-333, June.
    14. Wen-Jung Liang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Tzu-Kai Wang, 2012. "Symbiotic Production and Optimal Export Policy," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 582-600, October.
    15. Browning, Edgar K, 1976. "The Marginal Cost of Public Funds," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(2), pages 283-298, April.
    16. Christos Kotsogiannis & Konstantinos Serfes, 2014. "The Comparison of ad Valorem and Specific Taxation under Uncertainty," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(1), pages 48-68, February.
    17. Hwang, Hong & Miyagiwa, Kaz, 1997. "Strategic Export Subsidies under a Budget Constraint: Ad Valorem versus Specific," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 12, pages 87-98.
    18. Hong Hwang & Chao‐Cheng Mai & Hiroshi Ohta, 2010. "Export Subsidies, Cost Differential And Product Quality," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 32-41, February.
    19. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    20. Kay, J. A., 1980. "The deadweight loss from a tax system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 111-119, February.
    21. Leahy, Dermot & Montagna, Catia, 2001. "Strategic Trade Policy with Heterogeneous Costs," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 177-182, July.
    22. Ballard, Charles L & Shoven, John B & Whalley, John, 1985. "General Equilibrium Computations of the Marginal Welfare Costs of Taxes in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 128-138, March.
    23. Collie, David R., 2000. "State aid in the European Union: The prohibition of subsidies in an integrated market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 867-884, August.
    24. Koon Lam Shea & Esther Y. P. Shea, 2006. "On the Equivalence of Ad Valorem Tariffs and Specific Tariffs under Duopoly," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 445-451, August.
    25. Stuart, Charles E, 1984. "Welfare Costs per Dollar of Additional Tax Revenue in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 352-362, June.
    26. Diamond, P. A. & McFadden, D. L., 1974. "Some uses of the expenditure function in public finance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 3-21, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. K.L. Glen Ueng & Tsaur‐Chin Wu & Chih‐Ta Yen & Chih‐Ting Chou, 2022. "Market concentration and superiority among strategic export subsidy policies with taxation distortion and cost heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(2), pages 276-292, April.
    2. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2018. "Specific versus ad valorem taxes in the presence of cost and quality differences," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(5), pages 1197-1214, October.
    3. Beatriz Pereira & Sílvia Ferreira Jorge & Celeste Amorim Varum & Micaela Pinho, 2022. "Product Differentiation And Export Incentive Schemes: A Game Theory Approach," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 67(234), pages 55-80, July – Se.
    4. Wen-Jung Liang & Kuang Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou, 2018. "The superiority among specific, demand ad valorem and cost ad valorem subsidy regimes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. à lvarez-Albelo, Carmen D. & Hernández-Martín, Raúl & Padrón-Fumero, Noemi, 2020. "The effects on tourism of airfare subsidies for residents: The key role of packaging strategies," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Qidi Zhang & Leonard F.S. Wang & Yapo Yang, 2020. "Indirect taxation with shadow cost of public funds in mixed oligopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 415-425, April.
    2. K.L. Glen Ueng & Tsaur‐Chin Wu & Chih‐Ta Yen & Chih‐Ting Chou, 2022. "Market concentration and superiority among strategic export subsidy policies with taxation distortion and cost heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(2), pages 276-292, April.
    3. Mickaël Beaud & Thierry Blayac & Patrice Bougette & Soufiane Khoudmi & Philippe Mahenc & Stéphane Mussard, 2013. "Estimation du coût d'opportunité des fonds publics pour l'économie française," Working Papers halshs-01077141, HAL.
    4. Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1992. "Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 117-131, Summer.
    5. Chris Jones, 2005. "Why the Marginal Social Cost of Funds is not the Shadow Value of Government Revenue," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2005-449, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    6. Dermot Leahy & Catia Montagna, 1998. "Targeted Strategic Trade Policy with Domestic Cost Heterogeneity," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 100, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    7. Ming Chung Chang & Shufen Wu, 2011. "Should Marginal Cost of Public Funds include the Revenue Effect?," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 147(I), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Parry, Ian W.H., 1999. "Tax Deductions, Consumption Distortions, and the Marginal Excess Burden of Taxation," Discussion Papers 10801, Resources for the Future.
    9. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    10. Kleven, Henrik Jacobsen & Kreiner, Claus Thustrup, 2006. "The marginal cost of public funds: Hours of work versus labor force participation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 1955-1973, November.
    11. Nan, Gehuang D., 1995. "An energy Btu tax alternative," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 291-305, November.
    12. Rouillon, Sébastien, 2010. "Optimal law enforcement with costly public funds," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 345-348, December.
    13. Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2019. "Indirect taxes in a cross-border shopping model: a monopolistic competition approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 147-175, October.
    14. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Oligopoly and Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 197-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    15. Liqun Liu, 2004. "The Marginal Cost of Funds and the Shadow Prices of Public Sector Inputs and Outputs," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 17-29, January.
    16. Warlters, Michael & Auriol, Emmanuelle, 2005. "The marginal cost of public funds in Africa," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3679, The World Bank.
    17. Brander, James A., 1995. "Strategic trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1395-1455, Elsevier.
    18. Ian Parry, 2002. "Tax Deductions and the Marginal Welfare Cost of Taxation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 9(5), pages 531-552, September.
    19. Collie, David R., 2019. "Trade Wars under Oligopoly: Who Wins and is Free Trade Sustainable?," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2019/4, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    20. Wen-Jung Liang & Kuang Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou, 2018. "The superiority among specific, demand ad valorem and cost ad valorem subsidy regimes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 1-21, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:rdevec:v:19:y:2015:i:4:p:820-828. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1363-6669 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.